She lived on government assistance for years as a single mother before Harry Potter made her a billionaire and she seems pretty damn grateful for those benefits.

In fact, the successful author revealed (above) she pays "a lot of tax" on her fortune to the English government, but doesn't mind! She actually feels indebted to the system that provided for her and her child when nobody else would and told Jon Stewart:

Now, he's trying yet again to justify his comments, this time by claiming he wasn't the one who brought up Natalie in conversation:

"I didn't bring Natalie Portman up at all. In the context of the first chapter of my book, and that's how he kind of got into it, because I talk about the importance of the family as being the most fundamental unit of government. So in the course of that, he asked me about her acceptance speech. I used that as a segue, not to talk about Natalie Portman, but to talk about the economic realities of unwed mothers."

It doesn't matter what your initial intentions were, Mike. The fact is, you spoke poorly of her, and even worse you gave single mothers a bad name in general, EVEN THOUGH Natalie Portman is NOT a single mother!

We're sure you'll probably continue to try to justify your comments by claiming you were talking about "economic realities" and "statistics," but that doesn't change the fact that your approach to the discussion was in seriously poor taste.